According to the wiki of the dream argument, "the act of dreaming provides preliminary evidence that the senses we trust to distinguish reality from illusion should not be fully trusted, and therefore, any state that is dependent on our senses should at the very least be carefully examined and rigorously tested to determine whether it is in fact reality."
When reading this, I can't help but wonder why dreaming is considered a product of the senses. Would dreaming not be a product of the mind instead of the senses? If so, then why is it the senses that are being distrusted? Is it because the senses provide us with an account of an external reality that the mind is able to generate from within?
Moreover, in the simulated reality section of the wiki, the justification is as follows: it is possible for "the mind to be tricked into believing a mentally generated world is the 'real world.'"
This too makes me wonder why the senses are being distrusted if it's the mind that is being tricked. Why should we trust something that can be tricked in the first place?
When reading René Descartes' First Meditation (first paragraph on page 7), it becomes clear that he did distrust the mind along with the senses, since he asked: "how do I know that I am not deceived every time that I add two and three [in the mind], or count the sides of a square [in the mind], or judge of things yet simpler, if anything simpler can be imagined [by the mind]?"
I've been looking for articles that seriously question the trustworthiness of the mind, but the only ones I could find were those unsatisfactory "10 ways the mind deceives you" clickbait articles, and so it appears that the mind is generally trusted for no good reason other than necessity. I mention necessity because, after having pondered on this the entire day, the only valid reason I arrived at is that the mind is trusted simply because nothing remains to be trusted if the mind is distrusted (because everything is processed by the mind).
All this deep contemplation made me wonder whether there are any instances that prove that the mind can deceive itself in situations where sensory information is not a factor, such as through internal logic, arithmetic, or geometry. However, I could not come up with any valid argument against the mind, and now I wonder whether this proves that the mind is trustworthy on its own, although that is a fallacy since absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (if an argument can be imagined by you, please share it since it would contribute significantly to this question!).
I get that the senses may be providing the information that ultimately tricks the mind (i.e., the senses do the tricking), but that still does not explain why only the senses are considered to be untrustworthy. I'm looking for an answer as to why the mind is considered trustworthy, or an answer that contains an argument that indicates that the mind is not trustworthy either.